Hi and thanks for visiting the best Ravens forum on the planet. You do not have to be a member to browse the various forums, but in order to post and interact with your purple brethren, you will have to **register**. It only takes a couple of minutes. You can also use your Facebook account to log in....just click on the blue 'FConnect' link at the very top of the page.

Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

What does being suspended for the upcoming season have to do with his lack of playing time in 2006? The Bronco game on October 09, 2006 was classic Billick. MA was one of the few Ravens on offense who showed any sign of a pulse that game. He made the mistake of reeling off two straight first downs and never saw the field after that series. Billick had to stick with the starter and his less than 3 yard average in Denver. The coaching was attrocious that game not even taking into account the Clarence Moore play call in the endzone.

Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

My guess is that his career is over but a chance that he may re-appear similar as Terry Allen did if some team is decimated at the position. But that is a huge improbability with the year wait and staying in some kind of shape... if it was painkillers or cocaine this time, then scratch what I just said, he's preminantly out.
Didn't play a lot here, but sure had the appearance of a good soldier in the public eye.

Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

Originally Posted by RustonRifle

What does being suspended for the upcoming season have to do with his lack of playing time in 2006?

RR, what you are missing is what you've been missing all along. Your seat on the BLEACHERS is different from the coach's seat at ONE WINNING DRIVE and ON THE SIDELINE, so he has access to information you do not.

Earth to fans, earth to fans: Something was up with Mike Anderson. Nobody told us what it was, but there may have been a "reason" why he was not playing more than he was.

You guys who play Monday Morning Quarterback make me laugh. Save this f*ing thread, or at least this post, for a couple years and substitute "Harbaugh" for "Billick" so I can skip having to recreate this post from scratch.

:brickwall:

Festivus

His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.

Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

RR, I always and pretty much *only* cheer for the guys wearing the jersey right now. You take it off, don't let the door hit you. Really, 90% of them come and go and I don't give a crap. I won't shed a tear for Ray when he goes and I sure as hell didn't shed one for Jamal. I do save a little good will for the ones who show class on and off the field, regardless of their level of on-the-field contributions. I won't be sad to see Ray go, but it pained me to say farewell to Mulitalo.

Rhetorical questions are not an argument. But I will restate your argument thusly:

Mike Anderson had success running in one game, and in others as a change-of-pace back. He should have been the starting running back in more games afterward.

I just don't find that compelling. There's too much you don't know, about game planning, or personnel, or behind the scenes activity, to draw that conclusion from such a small amount of information. Occasional bursts through the line are pretty typical for the change-of-pace back. Musa Smith had pretty good YPC in that role. Zeroue (sp?) backed up Bettis, with higher yards per carry. That doesn't mean he should be a starter, though.

Look, RR. I know I'm not going to persuade you. But the way I read your argument (and those of others, here and elsewhere), is this: Billick had no rational reason for decision X. Therefore Billick was irrational.

Which I think is absurd, because for *years* we had a winning team on the field, and yet despite the fact that you know you aren't aware of all the contributing factors, you are still perfectly prepared to "deduce" from the very tiny tip of the iceberg that is the play on the field, that Billick was an irrational fool.

Not that it wasn't time for him to go, it may have been, but he was not the booger eating moron some of you say he was. Somewhere in the small space that is outside-what-you-know, there may have been a very good reason Mike Anderson was not playing. That's all I'm saying.

I'm not going to change your mind. This is an old argument.

Festivus

His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.

Re: Mike Anderson suspended for upcoming season

Rhetorical questions are not an argument. But I will restate your argument thusly:

Mike Anderson had success running in one game, and in others as a change-of-pace back. He should have been the starting running back in more games afterward.

That's my argument? where did I say that? I only implied the man should have been given more carries in the Denver game that he was one of the few Ravens on offense to have a pulse.

Originally Posted by festivus

Look, RR. I know I'm not going to persuade you. But the way I read your argument (and those of others, here and elsewhere), is this: Billick had no rational reason for decision X. Therefore Billick was irrational.

Which I think is absurd, because for *years* we had a winning team on the field, and yet despite the fact that you know you aren't aware of all the contributing factors, you are still perfectly prepared to "deduce" from the very tiny tip of the iceberg that is the play on the field, that Billick was an irrational fool.

Not that it wasn't time for him to go, it may have been, but he was not the booger eating moron some of you say he was. Somewhere in the small space that is outside-what-you-know, there may have been a very good reason Mike Anderson was not playing. That's all I'm saying.

I'm not going to change your mind. This is an old argument.

First of all where is my complaint that MA didn't get starts? You must know where it is since you accuse me of it.

Looks like your interjecting all kinds of innuendo and your personal theories and trying to label me or at best implicate your typing as my words, which they aren't.